Subscribe by Email

Subscribe in a Reader

Disclaimer

Blog comments do not reflect the views or opinions of the Author or Ancel Glink. Some of the content may be considered attorney advertising material under the applicable rules of certain states. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Please read our full disclaimer

Oklahoma's Supreme
Court has ruled that a Ten Commandments monument on the Oklahoma Capitol
grounds is unconstitutional under state law. The lower court had
ruled that the six-foot monument did not violate the state constitution because
of its historical value. Last week, however, the Oklahoma Supreme Court
reversed that ruling in Prescott v. Oklahoma Capital Preservation Commission, and ordered that the monument be removed.

The Oklahoma Supreme
Court rejected the Preservation Commission’s reliance on Van Orden v. Perry, 545 U.S. 677 (2005), a
case involving the U.S. Constitution’s Establishment Clause. The Oklahoma
court noted that “the issue in the case at hand is whether the Oklahoma Ten
Commandments monument violates the Oklahoma Constitution, not whether
it violates the Establishment Clause.” (emphasis in original). Article
2, Section 5 of the Oklahoma Constitution states:

No public money or
property shall ever be appropriated, applied, donated, or used, directly or
indirectly, for the use, benefit or support of any sect, church, denomination,
or system of religion, or for the use, benefit, or support of any priest,
preacher, minister, or other religious teacher or dignitary, or sectarian
institution as such.

The Court focused on
the use of the word “indirectly” in the state constitution to find the broad
and expansive prohibition against using public property to promote religion.

In light of this decision, local
governments may want to carefully review state
constitutions – in addition to federal law – before permitting state or
municipal religious displays on public property.